Analysis of the quality assurance results from the initial part of production of the ATLAS18 ITK strip sensors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The production of strip sensors for the ATLAS Inner Tracker (ITk) started in 2021. Since then, a Quality Assurance (QA) program has been carried out continuously, by using specific test structures, in parallel to the Quality Control (QC) inspection of the sensors. The QA program consists of monitoring sensor-specific characteristics and the technological process variability, before and after the irradiation with gammas, neutrons, and protons. After two years, half of the full production volume has been reached and we present an analysis of the parameters measured as part of the QA process. The main devices used for QA purposes are miniature strip sensors, monitor diodes, and the ATLAS test chip, which contains several test structures. Such devices are tested by several sites across the collaboration depending on the type of samples (non-irradiated components or irradiated with protons, neutrons, or gammas). The parameters extracted from the tests are then uploaded to a database and analyzed by Python scripts. These parameters are mainly examined through histograms and time-evolution plots to obtain parameter distributions, production trends, and meaningful parameter-to-parameter correlations. The purpose of this analysis is to identify possible deviations in the fabrication or the sensor quality, changes in the behavior of the test equipment at different test sites, or possible variability in the irradiation processes. The conclusions extracted from the QA program have allowed test optimization, establishment of control limits for the parameters, and a better understanding of device properties and fabrication trends. In addition, any abnormal results prompt immediate feedback to a vendor.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".